The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: Why It's Considered Pseudoscience

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is one of the most popular personality tests in the world. Many people have taken the test to find out if they are an Introvert or Extravert, a Thinker or a Feeler. However, despite its widespread use, many psychologists and researchers consider the MBTI to be pseudoscience. Let's dive into why that is.

What is the MBTI?

The MBTI is a personality test that classifies people into 16 different types based on four dichotomies:

• Introversion (I) vs. Extraversion (E)
• Sensing (S) vs. Intuition (N)
• Thinking (T) vs. Feeling (F)
• Judging (J) vs. Perceiving (P)

These categories are meant to describe how people perceive the world and make decisions. For example, an INFJ type is someone who is Introverted, Intuitive, Feeling, and Judging.

Why People Love It

The MBTI is popular for several reasons:

• Easy to Understand: The categories are simple and relatable.
• Positive Descriptions: The test tends to provide positive feedback, making people feel good about their results.
• Corporate Use: Many companies use the MBTI for team building and understanding employee dynamics.

The Problems with MBTI

Despite its popularity, the MBTI has several significant flaws that undermine its scientific credibility.

Lack of Scientific Validity and Reliability

• Validity: Validity refers to how well a test measures what it's supposed to measure. Research has shown that the MBTI does not reliably predict job performance, success, or satisfaction.
• Reliability: Reliability means that a test consistently produces the same results over time. Studies have found that many people get different results when they retake the MBTI after a few weeks, indicating low reliability.

Dichotomous Scales

The MBTI forces people into one of two categories for each dichotomy, but personality traits are not black and white. Most people fall somewhere in between. For example, you might be mostly introverted but still enjoy socializing occasionally. The MBTI's forced-choice format oversimplifies human personality.

Outdated Theory

The MBTI is based on Carl Jung's theories from the early 20th century. While Jung was a pioneer in psychology, his theories were not based on empirical research. Modern psychology has moved towards more evidence-based models of personality.

Lack of Acceptance in the Scientific Community

Despite its popularity in business and personal development, the MBTI is not widely accepted by psychologists. It is rarely used in contemporary psychological research or clinical practice. In contrast, the Big Five personality traits (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism) are well-supported by decades of research.

Better Alternatives

The Big Five personality traits offer a more accurate and reliable framework for understanding personality. Unlike the MBTI, the Big Five traits exist on a continuum, acknowledging the complexity of human behavior. This model is based on extensive scientific research and provides a more nuanced view of personality.

Conclusion

While the MBTI can be fun and offer some insights into your personality, it should be taken with a grain of salt. Its lack of scientific validity and reliability, reliance on outdated theories, and binary categorization make it more of a pseudoscience than a reliable psychological tool. For those interested in a more accurate understanding of personality, the Big Five traits are a better choice, backed by extensive research and scientific support.

In summary, the MBTI is an interesting tool for self-reflection but not a scientifically reliable method for understanding personality. Next time you take a personality test, consider the scientific evidence behind it and choose a model that offers a more accurate and reliable assessment of who you are.

Sources

• McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1989). Reinterpreting the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator from the perspective of the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Personality, 57(1), 17-40.
• Pittenger, D. J. (1993). The utility of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Review of Educational Research, 63(4), 467-488.
• Grant, A. M. (2013). Goodbye to MBTI, the fad that won't die. Psychology Today. Retrieved from Psychology Today
• Boyle, G. J. (1995). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI): Some psychometric limitations. Australian Psychologist, 30(1), 71-74.